

o *>*. c ■ 
/ * v 


a, ;, #vv a 

y 0 „ lA 



A 





A V 


■A ^ Oc- ^ * 

■? -V!n * o • cA *• ,, 

>, * 0 N 0 ’ <V *>. * »", 1 * <0 , , ♦ , % " 3 N 

o \> * Vf ' 0 / > *9‘ v\lo*J* C 

^ ^ xV * ^\:w c <^ s '' / i xa r </> & 

> • z < z 

> -a 


x P 


a v *> 

X' *y 

S o N 0 * <*. 



Vw>* V 

.;<" **'>V:; -,V* k V ,!T *,V “ 

■r <,. ,\ <“ jjt 'r ' A * 

• ' 1 . v* x°- 

> \v- + ■;■, ;//IXr x . 

^ * v ,0* 

V - f > s' 

^ ^ - - *• * 

'tP a*» 

A*. 






A <A 

*x X* ° 




✓ t^uwvcs 3 ■>> \x- •-£»<*• ztvjjy'ft > ^ . vvv _ 

v*^\/:. .. 

V V ' * 

a* <$> o WW ” <£ - HiSP^ -~ A v </ * ® 

. 'V J ./> ^ v *. • AF ■* v? * X •>>, ^ 

* <6 e> cl v * ^ C^“ t> 

..o\A .,. A '»•»“ A .» = /^ ' -''X .,.,%■»• 
.-... , ■* / v'X.% A c?' *XsvXA A ,.\1 Xi A 

^ ^ «/■ ’Kc, 4c * jt-‘i -A •#> v •*> <^n 'n^v _ ->o. A ■ ' X 2 , ^ 

,^V « ""^' /7 " ~ '- c ‘' 




x v v 


V 5 

V? -VC. o 



ft -*‘ .> 

^ A 


iV 4r 


V 

A 



* . ^ A- 

^\ v "<a. .j * vX 'A‘> 9 A v •>“. 1 A' S ^A' 

ct- * ^ C> -i a V ' > ^yil )&* V r/- ft CV -i O V- 

*X -O j 0 . ^ X) s' /y i s s '!A y o « n * , 0' < , ' / 

V , \ > 8 ^ A X 0 N f, V;, / ft ft S \\ \ 1 8 ^ -X N o N c , 'X^ 11 

N #////!% ^ ^ A' * Jfcnf/yy? 2 -’ * < -X X,^ ^ 

>A o A ^ 4 - V ^ 

; • ^ ^ ^ 

\° * 


^ '' "<5 O' 


✓* V^X. ■ . • .• ^ * -Sr ‘, CK .-%•■' y J ■ V- </* 

x Vov *•■'” >° s ^ r% 

X> v t- « a *. . ' .SS' ^ - 



C X # 

tP ,\V 


% ^ ■ 


X V 
vw O 0 X 

s^= X *+ ; ^ 

^ \V x<r. ^ 

X' X ' ^ ^ * 8 1 A * N sL° 

\> ^ ^ * o , > 0> s s 

,V %'''X'y->^ Xv C^ 

X%. XX-XX /> «^’«■;'•* <$\ '-.W^s * Xy- ° 

. V A* V y->/ ,.-^f ^ ’> -A, w v (c ~ vX ■**' ” * ’> •>*, v> 

^ <x '' •'' X .V.., % y °*^ A„»« a o A llt< %<< 

y *J&m&> * y v " T\", A ^- 

°C t ’': :I -'f“‘«. < A ^ 



: X X 




\' r\0 ^ ' ✓ ' v *~ » > 

'll' 1 A , * c , ^ » N 0 \^ v 

x^axx v a; 

' X ,A " ' 

A a c , 

a 


Sj5 Xp 

* X Ar.. * 


cA p 








' A.x" A 0 ' , , ' * O N o “>* 

^ C' \> 


° AV '^- ° 

^ \ -y* o 



X A 


A '».'■* A 

.CX , 0 M 





: -feo^ 


■Vj 




✓» , i '; 

r '. 


V*' O a r- 

* v A cP 

’ X \~ *-<. < 

% o 

N 0 

’/,. A 

c x> 


V * ^ 0 / 


r , V 

*<-T> 

a n 

^ f{\ &yi /'/) 

Pi \ '. v*i V r L-. /-s 


„> 0 ..,%'*»t.’■ x \:-»'XX'V 

A - «. s r>J ** C X V o, ' * o t S ■ 






















a * 

, s a O, < 



*x v 

oo x 


" v- V s " 

* / / , 

x<- x v 

-XV ® /Tf\ ' Av 

O 0 X 

. ■• o 

A 


■43/ * k° °x. * m 

Vo^tv iX 

>0 A. 0 

o5 ^ 



- "*> 

o 0 X ® « v - ^ 0 

\°'°^. 0 J.• • ' • -- a H ^ 

>, ^v 'O' 


** ^ "o 

„* V $X fJ&O* 0 

: ** v % vRt / % %|p/ A AN 

A- :, ■ sV # *V^^V**>V‘ 

^ j^;t, ? "-X ■f , s -r^ ,'. •"•ssfe. " ~X> .*&' *» 

' * ''o rs^ * ^ ■ * 


% ^ v 
,<. rf. 


x^ X 

, ^ - <i- r\ £\ a o 

'>% *- x rvJ ~ Q * h A 0>» 

% *•■'"</ a '* % v v 

X * *P'r~ • * > <\ v *• 

\ ° V « / { • 0 1 ^ -V 

z r -* cv L - - -r* -o. , -v 


* ,** 

V> *’"”' 



X ■■ - ^ " J ’•> ''',\^ „v 


<- -• '-'V y ^ 


A '% • °‘- ; -* 

X y o,X* x 

^ v * vl *% 

k \ " * Miwfeh + 

W 


/ ^5^0 


c o it 

+1* ^ 


/, c- 

% o v, 

A _- </X 

.VS 


o v , - X w * m* ,///7± * 

0 ^ V 0 ^SP jlw^ ^ '*© 0 N 

\° °^. * ° o5 ^ 

✓ %:. .a ■ > x v ^ 

^ * / r ^ v "' Cr C o *» o'* v# : 

> 8 " o> s'* ^ \> * 0 ' 

'tf. c r 
* « <v> aN 

tp \V 




N 0 ^. 

<•>, *• . ' * x ^,o' c o 

9 1 A s \** i, 

H * 0 /- > A^ v V V 

A 1 - <»r -^>- * <<* .\ 

"-) \ ‘ cT' v\' 

‘ - 45 i^ . 1 cr> ,^V 


r oc' 



y y, 

\° 

* 3 N o * X ^ X ^ > 

Cv V N > a0 s 

a ,A <\ ^ 

x ^ ^ so A n ^ cS 

z 



r75A\\v w s 

^ -, A? '* V^oar^- • 

Os ^ o * x * a0 <V- ° i i, t, s s | , 

-ry ' 

a/5»^L'_ ZjX * ,OO y * c 

-si ^7* . ^ *% -y \ ^ 

o> I^v , ... A,jr ^ A afc«. a > 

■s Or ■*- * -Si'M - * A r~k y « 

’* ^ ^ *.:>*' A°- s .i,\* A 

«, c,- * Aj—X ", 

'X fa , '/Lr - 

c, 











































BULLETIN OF THE 

B.S.DEPAKIM OFAffldTIl 


v 


No. 86 


Contribution from the Forest Products Laboratory, Forest Service, 

Henry S. Graves, Forester. 

March 14, 1914. 

(PROFESSIONAL PAPER.) 



TESTS OF WOODEN BARRELS. 


By J. A. Newlin, 
Engineer in Charge of Timber Tests. 


OBJECT OF THE TESTS. 

The object of the tests described in this bulletin, made in coopera¬ 
tion with the Bureau for the Safe Transportation of Dangerous 
Explosives, was to obtain data upon which specifications and changes 
in the design of wooden barrels used in the transportation of danger- 
ig ous liquids might be based. The tests do not offer any comparisons 
between barrels made of different material or of different species of 
timber. 

MATERIAL. 

The barrels used in the test were made by the St. Louis Cooperage 
Co., and were received in six groups of 8 barrels each (48 in all) as 
follows: 




Group 

No. 

Barrel No. 

Thickness 
of staves 
and heads. 

Number 
of hoops. 



Inches. 


1 

1 to 8 

Vs 

6 

2 

la to 8a 

H 

8 

3 

9 to 16 

% 

6 

4 

9a to 16a 

H 

8 

5 

17 to 24 

Vs 

6 

6 

17a to 24a 

% 

8 


t 


The barrels were made from quarter-sawed white oak. (One stave 
which seemed to be particularly porous was identified as red oak.) 
The material was practically straight grained and free from defects. 
The barrels were of excellent workmanship and were well coated 
with paraffin on the inside. The staves varied in width from 
about inches to about 7 inches. Thirty-one barrels had 19 staves 
each, 12 had 20 each, and 4 had 21 each. The heads were usually 

Note.— This bulletin describes tests that are of special interest to barrel manufacturers and to manu¬ 
facturers and shippers of dangerous liquids. 

32797°—14 Monograph 



































2 BULLETIN 86, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

composed of four pieces, though two heads were each composed of 
three pieces. The pieces of the head were joined together with 
3 ^-inch hickory dowels. There were tw T o dowels per joint, each 
about one-third or one-fourth the length of the joint from its end. 

The head and bilge hoops were If inches by 17 gauge, while the 
quarter hoops were 1J inches by 18 gauge. The average thick¬ 
nesses of hoops used for tension tests (see p. 4) were 0.051 inch 
and 0.061 inch for the 18 and 17 gauge, respectively, while the U. S. 
standard gauges of these numbers are 0.05 inch and 0.05625 inch. 

The average hoop spacing, dimensions, weights, and capacities of 
the barrels are shown on figure 1. The hoop splices were always 
placed over the bung stave, and the heads were placed with their 
end grain toward this stave as shown in I and II, figure 1. 

The barrels were received at the laboratory on November 24, and 
were stored in a closed and unheated shed until the tests were begun 
on December 10. 

BARREL TESTS. 

The barrels were brought in from the storage shed shortly before, 
the time for test. Each barrel was then carefully inspected and the 
hoops driven tight by a representative of the St. Louis Cooperage 
Co. Just before test each barrel was completely filled with water, and 
with the exception of those barrels to which a pressure gauge was 
attached, was closed with a wooden bung. These bungs, after soaking 
for a few seconds in warm water, were driven to a tight fit. They 
were placed with their grain parallel to that of the staves. The bungs 
bore the brand “U. S. Bung Mfg. Co., Cincinnati, O.” No bung 
straps were used. 

Two barrels of each group were tested in side compression, two in 
diagonal compression, one each in side and diagonal drop, and two 
by internal pressure. 

SIDE-COMPRESSION TESTS. 

In this test the barrel was placed between two flat surfaces and 
compressed in the direction of its diameter. The rate of compression 
was 0.25 inch per minute. Simultaneous readings of load, com¬ 
pression, and loss of water from the barrel were taken. The test 
was discontinued when one-half the water had escaped. Notes were 
made of the character and sequence of failures. In about one-half 
of these tests a pressure gauge was attached to the barrel, and read¬ 
ings of internal pressure were taken. The method of test is shown 
in Plate I. 

DIAGONAL-COMPRESSION TEST. 

In this test the barrel was compressed between two flat surfaces, 
being supported upon one point of the chime and loaded at a point 
on the other and diagonally opposite. The rate of compression was 
0.25 inch per minute. Notes were taken as in the side compression 
test. The test on the first barrel of each group was discontinued as 

0, 0F D, 

*ah a m ,/j m 





ThicAness 

Inches 

Vi eight 
Pounds 

Capacity 

Pounds 

Go//ons 

% 

K 

£4.8 

7/.0 

77.8 

487.2 

42Z.S 
4/27 

8-/2 

SO.S 

SO./ 



Thickness 

inches 

tfie/yh/ 

Povnc/s 

Capacity 

Pounds 

Go//ons 

% 

67.4 

426.7 

S/2 

S A 

74.6 

420.4 

SO.4 

tt 

22.6 

4/23 

SO.O 



ILL - MADE-UP BARREL -EI6HT HOOPS 
"stamps ZL'atad 


Weigh / 
Pounds 

Capacity 

Pounds 

G*//ons 

63.7 

424./ 

SO.8 


. J ui, , „ A n r Tt m vortical Tn the side-conmression and side-drop tests •* B ” was the top point. In the diagonal-compression and diagonal-drop tests “C” was the top point. Outside diameters of all 

Fig. 1—In the compression and drop tests all barrels were placed wlt ^ vMl atout one-third inch in bung^iameter and about one-tenth inch in diameter at the head. Average bung diameter was 24.9 inches; average diameter at tho head was 21.2 mches. 
regular barrels wgfg practically the same^ the total vanatio o 


32797°—14. (To face page 2.) 















































































































































































































































































































































































TESTS OF WOODEN BARRELS. 


3 


in the preceding test, while the second was discontinued whenever 
one-half the contents had escaped or would have escaped had the 
barrel been in the reverse position. This test is illustrated in 
Plate II. 

SIDE-DROP TEST. 

In this test the barrels were dropped on a wooden platform about 
3J inches thick resting on the concrete floor of the laboratory. On 
top of this platform was a steel plate one-eighth inch in thickness. 
The barrel was suspended with its axis horizontal. The first drop 
was 3 inches, the next 6 inches, etc., increasing each time by 3 inches. 
Each drop was upon the same point of the barrel. After the first 
apparent leak the drops were made at 3-minute intervals. The 
weight of the barrel and contents was taken immediately before 
each drop. The test was continued until half the contents of the 
barrel had escaped. Complete notes were made to show the character 
and sequence of the failures. A picture of this test is shown in 
Plate III. 

DIAGONAL-DROP TEST. 

This test was conducted in the manner described for the side-drop 
test, except that the barrel was suspended so that the lowest point of 
the chime was directly below the center of the barrel, which was 
dropped on the chime. Each drop was upon the same point. A 
picture of this test is shown in Plate IV. 

INTERNAL-PRESSURE TEST. 

In this test the barrel and connecting pipes were filled with water in 
such a way as to exclude as nearly as possible all air. The pressure 
was then raised to 2 pounds per square inch and held for 2 minutes. 
It was then raised to 4 pounds and there held for 2 minutes. This 
was repeated, increasing the pressure 2 pounds each time and holding 
it constant for 2 minutes after each increase, until 1 pound of water 
ran from the barrel in 1 minute or less. The test was then discon¬ 
tinued. Complete notes were made as to the character and sequence 
of the failures. 

In these tests connection to the barrel was made by screwing a 
special tapered bush into the bunghole. The apparatus is shown in 
Plnte V 

MINOR TESTS. 

STAVE TESTS. 

In order to find out something of the variability of the barrel 
material tests were made on 36 staves, two from each of 6 barrels of 
each thickness. The best and poorest appearing stave of each barrel 
was chosen. Pieces 2 inches in width, cut from these staves, were 
tested in static bending under center loading. The span was 28 
inches. The staves were placed with the outer side up. 




4 BULLETIN 86, U. S. DEPARTMENT OE AGRICULTURE. 

HOOP TESTS. 

A 14-inch piece was taken from one hoop of each gauge from each 
of three barrels of each group. These pieces were machined down to 
have a parallel section approximately 1 inch by 9 inches, and were 
then subjected to tension tests. The maximum load and load at 
yield point, as determined from the drop of the scale beam of the 
testing machine, were recorded. 

RESULTS. 

BARREL TESTS. 

The results of the barrel tests are given in Tables 3 to 6, inclusive. 

The internal-pressure readings on the barrels to which a pressure 
gauge was attached in the side-compression test have been omitted. 
The highest internal pressure developed in these barrels was 7 pounds 
per square inch. 

In all the test only two or three cases of leakage at the bung was 
observed. These also have been omitted from the tabulated results. 

MINOR TESTS. 

The average, maximum, and minimum results of the stave and hoop 
tests are given in Tables 1 and 2. In Table 1 “modulus of rupture” 
is the fiber stress at maximum load and represents the strength of the 
timber. “Work to maximum load” is proportional to the shock- 
resisting ability of the timber. 


Table 1 . —Results of stave tests. Static bending, 28-inch span. 



f-inch staves. 

f-inch staves. 

1-inch staves. 


Aver¬ 

age. 

Maxi¬ 

mum. 

Mini¬ 

mum. 

Aver¬ 

age. 

Maxi¬ 

mum. 

Mini¬ 

mum. 

Aver¬ 

age. 

Maxi¬ 

mum. 

Mini¬ 

mum. 

Measured thickness at stave, 










inches. 

0.69 

0.71 

0.65 

0.77 

0.80 

0.74 

0.89 

0.91 

0.87 

Rings.per inch.. 

15 

29 

8 

14 

25 

8 

21 

30 

14 

Specific gravity. 

Moisture.per cent.. 

0.672 

0.848 

0.528 

0.694 

0.820 

0.558 

0.663 

0.723 

0.544 

10.4 

14.1 

8.1 

9.8 

13.5 

7.3 

12.6 

14.8 

10.0 

Maximum load.pounds.. 

257 

395 

100 

378 

490 

220 

387 

510 

240 

Deflection at maximum load, 










inches. 

2.31 

5.20 

0.88 

1.98 

3.50 

1.22 

1.90 

3.50 

1.10 

Modulus of rupture, pounds 









per square inch. 

Work to maximum load, 

11,455 

17,950 

4,290 

13,260 

17,460 

8,220 

10,120 

12,860 

6,330 







inch-pounds per cubic 
inch. 

10.2 

29.8 

1.4 

10.0 

17.2 

3.8 

10.0 

16.7 

3.8 


Table 2. —Results of hoop tests. Tension, specimens 1 inch ivide. 


• 

18-gauge hoops. 

17-gauge hoops. 

Average. 

Maximum. 

Minimum. 

Average. 

Maximum. 

Minimum. 

Measured thickness of hoops, 

inches. 

Loadat yield point as determined 

by drop of beam.pounds.. 

Maximum load.do_ 

Fiber stress at yield point, pounds 

per square inch. 

Fiber stress at maximum load, 
pounds per square inch. 

0.051 

2,360 

3,955 

44,580 

74,210 

0.058 

2,900 

4,530 

49,500 

78,600 

0.047 

2,100 
3,580 

41.200 

70.200 

0.061 

2,480 

4,925 

39,515 

78,060 

0.063 

2,620 
5,130 

42.400 

82.400 

0.058 

2,330 

4,605 

36,000 

71,600 

























































Bui. 86, U. S. Dept, of Agriculture. 


Plate I 



Method of Test—Side Compression 







Bui. 86, U. S. Dept, of Agriculture 


Plate II 



Method of Test—Diagonal Compression 










Bui. 86, U. S. Dept, of Agriculture. 


Plate ill 



Method of Test—Side Drop. 
































Bui. 86, U. S. Dept, of Agriculture. 


Plate IV. 



Method of Test—Diagonal Drop. 






















Bui. 86, U. S. Dept, of Agriculture 


Plate V 



Method of Test—Internal Pressure. 

















TESTS OF WOODEN BARRELS. 


5 


GENERAL OBSERVATIONS OF NATURE OF FAILURES. 

In each kind of test the first water to appear on the outside of the 
barrel was usually from the seepage through the pores of the wood 
at the chime. The first leak usually occurred either between the 
staves and the head or between the staves at the chime. In all the 
tests except the internal pressure the first leak was usually coincident 
with the slipping of the staves. 

In the internal-pressure test there were two general classes of 
failures: (1) By springing and breaking of the head; and (2) by 
leaking between the staves at the bilge. 

In the diagonal-compression test the failure was a general failure 
of the head combined with the slipping of the staves. In the com 
pression-perpendicular test the failure was a general leaking at the 
heads and slipping of the staves followed by the breaking of the 
staves at the bilge. 

In the side-drop test the slipping of the staves caused loosening of 
the hoops and leakage at the heads. This was followed by breaking 
of the staves at the bilge. In three of the six tests the failure of the 
barrels was due to the heads being broken or forced out by the 
internal pressure produced by the impact. 

The lower heads of all barrels tested by dropping on the chime were 
broken or forced out by the pressure due to the impact. 

CHANGES IN DESIGN AS INDICATED BY THE CHARACTER OF THE 

FAILURES. 

A slight increase in the length of the chime from croze to the end of 

o o 

the stave would lessen the amount of seepage without any marked 
increase of liability to breakage at the croze by dropping the barrel 
on the chime. The chimes of the test barrels were made exceptionally 
short (three-fourths of an inch from outer side of croze to end of stave) 
to reduce the danger of breakage when dropped on the chime. Chimes 
1 inch long would probably have given better results. 

The internal-pressure test and the side-drop test indicated that the 
bilge hoops were too wide apart. A spacing of not more than 8 inches 
between the bilge hoops would have materially strengthened the bar¬ 
rels for the internal pressure without any weakening for the other tests. 

The weakest parts of the barrels were the heads. The first leak in 
most of the tests was due either to the springing of the head or to the 
slipping of the staves at the head, or to both these causes. 

The ultimate failure of a large per cent of the barrels was at the head. 
It appears that a head much thicker than the staves would give mate¬ 
rially better results. Heads should probably be made about one and 
one-half times as thick as the staves. 

The heads appeared to be materially weakened by the dowel holes 
and not infrequently the flagging was forced out. It would seem that 
these head joints could be improved. 


6 Bulletin 86, u. s. department of agriculture. 

None of tlie lioops failed during the test. A f-inch oak barrel 
should probably have not less then eight hoops of the sizes of those 
used on the barrels tested, as the swelling of the wood might break 
the hoops. 

Variation in strength of barrels of the same design is due in large 
measure to the variability of the wood composing the head and 
staves. Test specimens taken from these barrels show that some of 
the staves may have less than one-fourtli the strength of others. (See 
Table 1, p. 4.) Evidently no attempt had been made to grade the 
staves on the basis of strength, the only criterion of fitness being that 
the staves should be clear and straight grained. The dry weight per 
cubic foot of clear straight-grained wood is a splendid guide as to 
probable strength, the heavier, denser wood being the stronger. The 
advisability of grading staves and heading with reference to the 

strength might well be considered. 

/ 

TESTS OF MADE-UP BARRELS. 

BARRELS. 

In order to try out the effect of some of the changes in design as 
suggested above, barrels were made up with f-inch staves, f-inch head, 
and eight hoops. The staves and hoops were from the two 8-lioop, 
f-inch barrels, the heads from f-inch barrels and previously tested 
under internal pressure. In order to make these heads fit, it was 
necessary to joint fifteen-sixteenths inch off of one stave of each 
barrel. The bilge and quarter hoops were not changed, but were 
permitted to drive farther onto the barrels. The head hoops were 
shortened If inches and were driven flush with the ends of the staves. 
(In the original tests the head hoops were driven beyond the ends of 
the staves, as shown in I and II of fig. 1.) The spacing of the hoops, 
weight, capacity, etc., of these barrels are shown in III, figure 1. 
In assembling the barrels the hoop joints were placed at random. 

INTERNAL-PRESSURE TESTS. 

The two made-up barrels were tested under internal pressure. The 
results of these tests showed them to be fully equal to the barrels 
with f-inch heads and staves. One of these barrels withstood a 
pressure of 34 pounds per square inch up to the time the head began 
to fail, when the pressure was released. The increased capacity of 
the barrel under this pressure, due primarily to the springing of the 
heads, was 8f pounds of water. On release of the pressure the barrel 
resumed its original form with no apparent leakage. 

The head of the second barrel was broken out by a pressure of 38 
pounds per square inch. 

Neither of these made-up barrels showed any leakage between the 
staves during the tests. 


TESTS OF WOODEN BARRELS. 


7 


DROP TESTS. 

Tlie broken heads of the made-up barrels were replaced by other 
|-inch heads, and the barrels subjected to drop tests. The barrel 
dropped upon the side showed much better resistance than the 8-hoop 
barrel five-eighths inch in thickness throughout, but was not quite 
the equal of the J-inch barrels. 

In dropping on the chime the made-up barrel was the equal of any 
barrel tested. 

These tests of made-up barrels seem to justify the previously sug¬ 
gested changes in thickness of head and spacing of hoops. 

The detailed results of these tests are given in Table 5. 

SUGGESTIONS REGARDING TESTS OF SHIPPING CONTAINERS. 

There are two classes of tests to which containers such as barrels 
may be subjected: 

First. Tests, such as the ones described in this bulletin, where the 
object is to determine the most economical and efficient designs. 
Tests of this class are usually carried to the destruction of the con¬ 
tainer and entail damage or complete loss of contents. It is neces¬ 
sary to fill the containers with material which is relatively inexpensive, 
safe to the investigators, and which will produce stresses similar in 
character to those which would be produced by the commodity which 
the container is intended to carry. 

Second. Tests to determine the suitability of the container for 
specified commodities under practical conditions. Such tests should 
be made upon containers filled with the material to be shipped in 
them or with some other very similar in its action on the container. 

In the case of the first class of tests seepage through the pores and 
the first leak depend largely upon the nature of the lining and of the 
contained liquid. A material difference might be expected in the 
behavior of barrels lined with paraffin and filled with water as com¬ 
pared with barrels lined with glue and filled with gasoline. In the 
drop test the height of drop also depends upon the specific gravity of 
the contained liquid. The height of drop required to produce given 
stresses is in approximately inverse proportion to the combined weight 
of barrel and contents. 

Having made tests of the first class, and so determined the best 
construction, it then remains to manufacture containers in accordance 
with specifications based upon the results of these tests. Tests of 
the second class made upon such containers lined according to com¬ 
mercial practice and filled with the commodity they are to carry 
would show their limitations under practical conditions. 

In the case of barrels internal-pressure and side-drop tests are 
recommended for this purpose. 


8 


BULLETIN 86, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 


Table 3. —Individual tests—Side compression. 


f INCH BARRELS. 


No. 

of 

barrel. 

Num¬ 
ber of 
hoops. 

Deflec¬ 

tion. 

Load. 

Rate 

of 

leaking. 

Remarks. 





Lbs. per 






minute. 


1 

6 

0.81 

5,000 


Seepage through pores. 



1.12 

6,000 


Staves slip. 



1.24 

6,340 


Leak between staves. 



2.35 

8,920 


Stave broke. 



3.80 

11,000 

1.6 

Horizontal shear in top stave. 



5.38 

14,380 

6.5 

Stave broke. 



6.35 

13,640 

42.8 

One-half contents escaped. 

2 

6 

.88 

5,000 


Leak at chime. 



1.20 

6; 000 


Stave slipped. 



2.54 

8,500 

1.7 

Stave sheared. 



5.97 

10,850 

29.0 

One-half contents escaped. 

la 

8 

.85 

5,500 


Leak between staves. 



1.08 

6,500 


Staves slip. 



2.80 

9,460 

2.1 

Bottom stave sheared. * * 



3.80 

11,250 

15.0 

Stave split. 



4.37 

11,000 

23.0 

Stave broke. 



5.40 

12,310 

31.0 

Do. 



5.70 

11,880 

32.0 

One-half contents escaped. 

2a 

8 

.60 

4,500 


Seepage through pores. 



.64 

4,750 


Leakage around end at bottom. 



1.55 

7,500 


Staves slip. 



3.80 

12,320 

2.9 

Stave broke. 



4.62 

12,070 

2.0 

Bottom stave broke. 



7.11 

15,040 

28.0 

Stave broke. 



7.61 

15,370 

52.0 

One-half contents escaped. 


f-INCH BARRELS. 


9 

6 

0.57 

5,000 


Leak at chime. 



.77 

6,000 


Seepage through pores. 



.86 

6,500 


Staves slip. 



2.35 

9,730 

10.5 

Stave broke. 



3.36 

10,830 

37.0 

Do. 



3.75 

11,380 

39.4 

One-half contents escaped. 

10 

6 

.77 

5,500 


Seepage through pores. 



.90 

6,000 


Staves slip. 



1.24 

7,000 


Leak between staves and at chimes. 



2. 88 

10,910 

9.0 

Bottom stave broke. 



4.00 

11,110 

39.0 

Increased breaking. 


- 

4.30 

10,420 

57.0 

One-half contents escaped. 

9a 

8 

.64 

5,500 


Leak between staves. 



.86 

6,500 


Leak at chime. 



1.15 

8,000 


Staves slip. 



3.60 

11,590 

25.2 

Top stave sheared. 



4.35 

12, 430 

37.5 

Bottom stave broke. 



4.53 

12,390 

33.6 

One-half contents escaped. 

10a 

8 

.57 

5,000 


Leak at chime. 



1.03 

7,000 


Staves slip. 



1.70 

8,860 

1.0 

Leak between staves. 



3.80 

12,010 

34.0 

One-half contents escaped. 


f-INCH BARRELS. 


17 

6 

0.86 

5,500 


Leak at chime. 



1.20 

6,500 


Staves slip. 



4.27 

12,870 

21.3 

Top stave broke. 



4.40 

12,260 

24.8 

Do. 



4.91 

11,110 

28.0 

Stave broke. 



5.58 

11,830 

35.2 

One-half contents escaped. 

18 

6 

.90 

6,500 


Leak through joint of head. 



1.10 

7,000 


Seepage through pores. 



1.63 

8,500 


Leak between staves. 



2.14 

9,000 

1.5 

Stave broke. 



5.78 

12,940 

26.8 

One-half contents escaped. 

17a 

8 

.56 

4,500 


Leak at chime. 



.92 

6,000 


Seepage through pores. 



1.22 

7,000 


Staves slip. 



2.75 

10, 750 

5.1 

Head coming loose. 



3.75 

12,150 

23.1 

Top stave broke. 



4.15 

12,200 

35.4 

Do. 



4.65 

12,530 

34.0 

Stave broke. 



4.88 

13,020 

40.0 

One-half contents escaped. 

18a 

8 

.83 

6,000 


Leak at chime; staves slip. 



1.00 

6,500 


Leak between staves. 



2.95 

11,100 

1.0 

Top stave broke. 



5.43 

16,280 

20.0 

Bottom stave broke. 



5.50 

15,190 

20.0 

Do. 



6.40 

14,090 

40.5 

One-half contents escaped. 


























































TESTS OF WOODEN BARRELS. 


9 


Table 4. —Individual tests—Diagonal compression. 
f-INCn BARRELS. 


No. 

of 

barrel. 

Num¬ 
ber of 
Loops. 

Deflec¬ 

tion. 

Load. 

Rate 

of 

leaking. 

Remarks. 





Lbs. 'per 






minute. 


3 

6 

0.56 

7,000 


Leak at chime. 



1.45 

11,000 

1.0 

Staves sheared. 



3.40 

15, 620 

6.0 

Bottom head broke. 



3.56 

10,020 


One-half contents escaped. 

4 

6 

.77 

8, 000 


Leak at chime; staves slipping. 



3.78 

16, 240 

13.5 

Bottom head broke. 



4. 48 

10, 990 

80.0 

One-half contents escaped. 

3a 

8 

.85 

8, 500 


Leak at bottom chime. 



1.38 

13, 000 


Leak at top chime. 



1.55 

14, 000 


Staves slipping. 



2.26 

16, 400 

4.5 

Top head breaking. 



2. 85 

15, 000 

7.5 

Top head broke. 

4a 

8 

.97 

8,500 


Leaks at top and bottom chimes. 



1.73 

14, 480 

4.0 

Staves slip; bottom head breaking. 



2.50 

15, 440 

14.5 

Bottom head broke. 


flNCH BARRELS. 


M 

6 

0.62 

7, 500 


Leak at chime. 



1.18 

11, 000 


Leak at bearing. 



1.50 

12, 460 


Top head broke; staves sheared. 



5. 73 

17,000 

0.5 

Staves breaking at top. 



8.42 

17, 850 

39.0 

One-half contents escaped. 

12 

6 

.90 

9,000 


Leak at bottom stave. 



1.26 

11,500 


Stave splitting at top. 



1.50 

12, 500 


Leak at bottom chime. 



3.20 

16, 530 

8.8 

Bottom head broke. 

11a 

8 

.58 

8,000 


Leak at bottom chime. 



1.48 

14, 500 

2.5 

Staves slipping. 



2.10 

16, 000 

6.0 

Top head broke. 

12a 

8 

.75 

8, 000 


Leak at top chime. 



1.53 

14,000 


Staves slipping. 



2. 47 

16, 970 

4.7 

Top head broke. 



9.25 

24, 260 

16.0 

Test discontinued. 





i-INCH 

BARRELS. 

19 

6 

0.42 

6, 500 


Leak at bottom chime. 



.77 

8,500 


Staves slipping. 



1.68 

11, 500 


Leak at top chime. 



3.73 

17, 660 

4.0 

Top head splitting. 



5.50 

18, 000 

32.0 

Top head broke. 



7.47 

11, 540 

9.3 

One-half contents escaped. * 

20 

6 

.81 

9,500 


Leak at bottom chime; staves slipping. 



1.12 

10, 500 


Leak between staves at bottom. 



2.34 

14, 560 


Staves slipping. 



4.20 

19, 280 

7.2 

Top head breaking. 



5. 00 

20, 530 

21.0 

Top head broke. 

19a 

8 

.62 

8, 000 


Leak at bottom chime. 



1.43 

13, 000 


Staves slipping. 



3.83 

19, 790 

11.0 

Staves sheared at chime. 



4. 85 

21, 740 

36.6 

Top head broke. 



5.05 

21, 650 

72.0 

One-half contents escaped. 

20a 

8 

.82 

11,000 


Leak at bottom chime. 



.95 

11, 500 


Staves slipping. 



1.27 

12, 500 


Leak at top chime. 



2.35 

16, 500 


Bottom head breaking. 



2.70 

17, 200 


Bottom head broke. 


.1 
































































10 BULLETIN 86, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

Table 5. —Individual tests—Drop tests. 
f-INCH BARRELS. 


No. of 
barrel. 

Num¬ 
ber of 
hoops. 

Height 
ofdrop. 

Rate of 
leakage. 

Remarks. 

SIDE DROP. 




Lbs. per 




Inches. 

minute. 


5 

6 

6 


Stave slipped; leak at chimes. 



12 


Leak between staves. 



18 

0.3 

Stave cracked. 



24 

.7 

Head cracked; hoops slipped at head. 



30 

2.0 

Head broke out. 

5a 

8 

6 


Leak at chime and between staves. 



9 


Staves slipping. 



12 


Stave broke. 



24 

.3 

Flag coming out at head. 



27 

2.0 

Head broke out; split at dowels. 

DIAGONAL DROP. 

6 

6 

9 


Leak at chime. 



12 


Head broke. 

6a 

8 

9 


Head broke out. 


1-INCH BARRELS. 


SIDE DROP. 

13 

6 

6 


Leaking slightly. 

Leak of chime and between staves. 

9 


13a 

8 

15 

24 

39 

9 

0.2 

1.0 

23.2 

Stave broke. 

Hoop slipped at head. 

Test discontinued. 

Leak at chime; stave slipped. 

Stave broke. 


12 




21 

35.7 

Bilge hoop slipped. 

DIAGONAL DROP. 

14 

6 

X 

9 


Leak at chime. 

15 


Head failing. 

Head broke out. 



18 


14a 

8 

9 


Leak between staves. 

15 


Flag coming out. 

Head broke out. 

* 



18 

0.3 


1-INCH BARRELS. 


SIDE DROP. 

21 

6 

9 


Leaks at chimes; staves slipped. 



21 


Stave broke. 



24 


Bilge hoop slips. 



27 

2.0 

Head hoop slipped. 



48 

11.3 

Test discontinued. 

21a 

8 

9 


Stave slips. > 



21 


Leak at chime. 



33 

.3 

Head broke. 



36 

.7 

Head broke out. 

DIAGONAL DROP. 

4 

22 

6 

6 


Leak at chime. 

1 


12 


Stave sheared. 



15 

0.7 

Leak through joint of head. 



21 

.3 

Head broke out. 

22a 

8 

15 

.6 

Head breaking. 



18 

.4 

Head broke out. 
















































































TESTS OF WOODEN BARRELS. 


11 


Table 6. —Individual tests—Internal pressure. 


I-inch barrels. 


No. of 
barrel. 

Num¬ 
ber of 
hoops. 

Pres¬ 

sure. 

Rate of leakage. 

Remarks. 

7 

6 

Lbs. per 
sq. inch. 
2 

Drops per 
minute. 

Lbs. per 
minute. 

Seepage through pores. 

Leak between staves. 



4 

5 




8 

120 


Head bulged flush with chime. 

Leak at chime; broken stream. 

Leak between staves. 



10 


• 


12 


4 

8 

6 

2 



Leak at chime. 



4 

200 




6 


Leak between staves at bilge. 

Heads bulged flush with chimes. 

Seeping in stream through pores. 

Leak through joints of head. 

Displacement of flag. 

Seepage through pores. 

Leak at chimes and head bulged flush with 
chime. 

Leak through joints at end. 

Flag forced out. 

Seepage through pores. 

Leak between staves at end. 



8 





10 





12 





13 



7a 

8 

4 




8 





10 

120 




16 


Sa 

! 

8 

2 




4 





8 



Head bulged flush with chime; leak between 
staves at bilge and through joints in head. 



12 

60 




14 

1.2 

Leak in head. 





I-inch barrels. 


u 

6 

2 




6 





8 

108 




12 

* 120 




14 




16 


2.0 

16 

6 

2 


4 

26 




10 

96 




14 




16 

132 




18 




22 


2.0 

15a 

8 

2 



4 

60 




10 




12 





14 





18 


2.4 

16a 

8 

2 


4 





8 

2 




10 

20 




14 




16 

38 




22 




24 








I-inch 


Seepage through pores. 

Leak between staves at end. 
Streaming between staves at end. 

Head bulged flush with chime. 

Leak between staves at bilge. 

Seepage through pores; leak at chime. 


Leak between staves at bilge. 
Heads bulged flush with chime. 
Leak between staves at quarter. 
General leak between staves. 
Seepage through pores. 

Leak at chime. 

Squirting at chime. 

Leak between staves at end. 
Head bulged flush with chime. 
Test discontinued. 

Seepage through pores. 

Leak at chime. 


Leak between staves at bilge. 

Head bulged flush with chime. 

Stream through joints of head. 

Leak through joints of head; displaced flag. 


BARRELS. 


23 

6 

4 



Leak at chime and at flag; seepage through 





pores. 



8 

6 





12 

14 





14 



Leak between staves at bilge. 



18 



Head bulged flush with chime. 



20 



Leak at joint of head. 



24 


1.2 

Leak between staves. 

24 

6 

4 



Seepage through pores; leak at chime. 

10 

52 




12 

50 


Leak between staves at quarter. 



14 



Leak between staves at bilge. 



18 

70 


Head bulged flush with chime. 



20 

82 


Leak at joints of head. 



28 


1.5 

Leak between staves. 







































































































12 


BULLETIN 86, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

Table 6.— Individual tests—Internal pressure — Continued. 
i-INCH BARRELS—Continued. 


No. of 
barrel. 

Num¬ 
ber of 
hoops. 

Pres¬ 

sure. 

Rate of leakage. 

Remarks. 

23a 

8 

Lbs. per 
sq.inch. 
6 

Drops per 
minute. 

Lbs. per 
minute. 

Seepage through pores; leak at joints of head. 

12 

20 




16 

84 


Head bulged flush with chime. 

Leak between staves at bilge. 



20 

180 




30 

2.0 

Test discontinued. 

24a 

8 

4 


Leak between staves at chime. 

8 



Seepage through pores. 



16 

4 




18 

12 


Leak between staves at quarter. 



22 


Head bulged flush with chime. 



24 



Leak at joints of head; leak between staves at 



30 

36 


bilge. 



36 


Head breaking. 

Head broke out. 



38 








Table 7.— Individual tests — Made-up barrels. 
INTERNAL-PRESSURE TESTS. 


No. of 
barrel. 

Num¬ 
ber of 
hoops. 

Pres¬ 

sure. 

Rate of leakage. 

Remarks. 


8 

Lbs. per 
sq. in. 

4 

Drops per 
minute. 

Lbs. per 
minute. 

Leak through defective joint in head. 


10 

115 




14 


Leak at defective joint ceasing. 



16 

55 




22 

56 


Head bulged flush with chime. 



26 

55 




32 

130 





34 


Head split at joint. 

Seepage through pores. 

Leak at chime. 


8 

4 

. 




6 

6 




12 

130 




18 

180 





24 


Head bulged flush with chime. 

Leaking in broken stream. 

Head forced out. 



26 to 36 





38 








DROP TESTS. 


No. of 
barrel. 

Num¬ 
ber of 
hoops. 

Height 
of drop. 

Rate of 
leakage. 

Remarks. 

SIDE DROP. 


8 

Inches. 

12 

Lbs. per 
minute. 

Leak at chime; stave slips. 

Stave cracked. 


J8 




21 


Hoop slips. 

Two broken staves. 



33 

21.0 

DIAGONAL DROP. 


8 

9 


Leak at chime. 


12 


Stave slips. 



18 


Head failing. 

Head broke out. 



21 

7.7 



















































































ADDITIONAL COPIES 

OF THIS PUBLICATION MAY BE PROCURED FROM 
THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS 
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
WASHINGTON, D. C. 

AT 

5 CENTS PER COPY 


V 





















% 




















































\ V tp 

'jy © 

' ,1"( \ '*’ ‘V’ c°* ‘ 



o ,M *, 'A £*. •> 

A 'A' A \ ’ 
^ * * # x » 1 ;;; * v ® 


O * V 



•bo' 


A -V 


% **■ 

« 

* v 0 o y * 

N A •A> V 

' ** y # - r 

^ y * 

<v </i 2 ’ ••••■ ^, y » c a 3 . 

^ \°yy./ V'*« 

* *.0 < ^ ' A ft 


=» sH ^ 

NT ^ 

o x >, - a ' o.V 


// '~~ <jr s % A 

' ** S .\\ 1 * * *fe 

- - o- ■%, y yy, ° 

: -w : - y :4«y w 
-■w '° £ X \ 

■»^tT’* / y ».',x*'i 0 - ° 

• \> x ’"»'. > ^ % • > 

y . *■ .«>.». v .ox a» * * v> . y, , v 

y y :$$$/%% %$' i MUmk z * A • . 2 

> •?„ = . 






v ‘ ' y ->- « o_> 

°v—v\-. 



<V 

*> 

SSS ■ •■' 

v * y' s ■ 


& y. s v rxO 

A » « ■ > * A . s 




a\ :inp» • «,*•%. "S# - A V « 

y > v^g|s - ^ y yy y ^ %y&5rs - %- % 

a. 4 : 






’> N 



A tj, r "C'^T/- 

v \V V. - . , ,• ~ > ' 

- o* ^ .0- c o y 

‘ 5N ° \> V \y*o. ^> 81 

- ^ , x -V^:% .p ,y v « ^ s 

** ^ * y ,.: v /; ; c * 3 > ** -• / I ry : ** <& 

2 \ z 

„, xw ^ ^ _ ° v y ‘tOfLXtf* * y’ 

O a / 0 \ * ,0^ <" s s A O *o * y* ,0 V 

N " N c * A? <■ L 1 8 « r b ^ c 0 N C 


y ^ 


$% \ 
\e> -<• * 



° o5 ^ " 

\> ^ ^ 

y ,<■ .0- c*v #- 

> ‘ N \> > ” ■ ■ . 0 ’ 

-<- *- -3 < 5 , « S 

y y ° % y * 

r y ^ • 






r 
<» 

•<* 

*> 

O y ^-.'t - <* o * <^» ^ '- - * \ x fvO 

, ’ a ~° y ,t.., y •■’*y\ 

^ «. <3 tj •» .A ' 'x 

* v, _ r „r\ f< >-; /i. <»■ 

yA -. e^ ;• <r ”v iw/ «?*% y v- \.°- 

0 - s >v k < y*^ •jy ty ^ o,' v' ,>*'\ t> 

y o- 1 y >/ ■'v.. . ’ o^° »•“. V' "/.y 

x csaa'v^ >■ ■ A ^ j&ji' /,/ ^2. *■ v Ayv-4 ^ 'y, A x Jpdf//y5 2 -> ? 

^ y, . ,. _ 

r~> > v *xi^ j 

* ^ ■ * * y ^ 0 N 0 ^ x^ 

V. , A .w*>, ^ Vz\<? y ; 





o 

V^ip ; ■■■ '• >° y 

>' *• - * >°; x—IV /,—;V.«y x 

•*• A ^ k v .aV/)i\ % A' * 


x 0 ^. 



y y i 




® c, y< 

C.x - 

* Y • A<. < 

•>- 0 X . - -x.,,u. ^ ' 

* 

o -4 >■ 

^ llU x ^ . .Cy ! rU , ^ //infiM . 

y' ^u\\ \ x y. ^ ^yjjy£P >> ^ 

’y^..,V‘-'*/xx. a-c. 

r ;5 5 ) *, - a» A <“ ^ 




y v \ l • 

v <y + 

S A/ J rS A O ^ 

* ,/y.A\ 

A C £ ’ '-' ■ * . 

O o' 


9 N 




*> y. " 

^ o> <?* » 

X /* V* -, % 

0 * x A° <> 

•o 1 c ° N °y 

^ ’ t> _xvsv 2V y 


■0 N 


/ /■ A ^ 




$%> - 
y? <f- 0 



y> % 









































0 M C ' * * ' A> * v 1 * 4 r 'o. ‘ y .y C 0 N c ♦ 

(y * v v i ° 0 

*b 4 =-' ':yr^\ ^ V* * 4fe ^ W 

\°°- 

■i 0 " v ,., /' ,.„ %"».,i*’ ( 

-Q* S _ 7 * O. V * ' ° ^ ^ V 

\ <* ^ *• ic * - -* X 


V V* 



- 


U j» V. 


^ V 


* -C? 

qX 

* a 0 <* 

0 V * - • * -p 

>°<=x. 

i' rf- '. .* A A - 1 \VW 

*>- * * »' * ^ 0 s * ♦ * 3 H 0 v* 

A > v 0 ' v S ^ * CV V 

;, * . A ~iS _ v M "■fXW <* f=> . r 

\ %**'■ ; iSfe' * 
r " ^ v %, / \ ' 


c» ( : ' A / 

*> ^ « aV <p 


mi. 

'**"\^ .« 1 "* V '” ' ,</'A N A '**'. 




<p 





’oo’ 1 


iV 


Y + 0 



y, 

y< 




t- ' r ^-' 

\ 



, 1 * 

Of. s 




* V ”■>* %W,\^ ^ Y v ^ 

3,, y 0 « V * <0 ~ s % A 0 * x A° 0 N c , 

, ^ , 0 V C 0N C(P ,<■' ‘ 8 * ,, O 0 -0^ * C * 

*mnrn^\ >, .-^ * »(rz^\ 

a V ^ ^ ^ x 





.Oo * _^, 1TOC J| _ ^ , ., 

X -<• ■* ^ >, n 1 ?' / c^ 

%* ,'?'■ c^, #. 

O , 4 •. N 0 ’ A 

V »•>*» 

<* ^ <, 

'P> rf* * 



, iv . awa"''. ^ rs^\ r y. .y ''y\%€/ly ' 

:. t * * ^ <• '«> y-' A V * V ,V» * ' A0 r , „ , ^ ^ 7. O A . 

o* <,•“«♦. ** A 4 s'"‘y °o (?■ % ..* v 




% v 
A. •/>, 


o ! 

’ » f X % ^ 

s S \A , ^ y o „ x a 1 

A^ X V « v ' * * - ,0 t 

v V yr^To ^ 


)° 0 X. 

' ^ * V. 

V', ." A” Y # % ' -o 

v x » , “ ° A 


C -V, 0 M 0 • 

s t « , -/a. 

.0 v , s ^ *t C‘ 




0 X 


- • > \ v rj, 

* <aS cK 

/ ^ V ^ r. <^> ^ O .!> 

AP AV - ASg 

<P \V • a 



^ qX' 

^ A° 0 wc, 




' * , * 4 * A V V 

^ ^ JiX 

A- v^ ; 

^ Oo x> 

V s c\ r> y o a > r> ^ 

* ^ , 0 - -o « 0 o ? ^ >,o‘ 

o^ V s * * *■/ ^ v> ^ Y 0 ^ > 

A.^ %,/' ^'» 





'X 


> x % .> 


3 ^ 

A Je ’ V - * 

0 * v ■* A 0 V o N C 7 * s '^\ X «, V • * 4 y " ’ X Q^'c 0 N c * '<o 1 " v‘ l 

r\> c u * . <&. aa \ /v> _ -i *<*> c. ■» ^ ^ ^ 


V» V 

O 0 




^ <*• 









"» rr«° v^’ 

s n o T v* ^ . \ 




# i ' 


V % 0 A 


o » \ 


* 0 

* s 0 ♦oso 1 

kfA\ % /' * ft?- - ^ ^ 

cS ° ,^ V -P- o '(//«» \XT « a, 

■* < /''J - s "' ‘ ,-X P >/ ‘ ' 0 * s K 


r ,««.% ' ♦ * - ^ 
c . 0 •' ,^. *-. P. 


A' <. v 1 B T O. 

>\ V V 1 

i v> v . ri'+-j 


























































































